Re: [IMPORTANT] OSCON 1 or 2 booths?

From: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)surnet(dot)cl>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Advocacy <pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: [IMPORTANT] OSCON 1 or 2 booths?
Date: 2005-06-07 20:35:26
Message-ID: 20050607203526.GB28361@surnet.cl
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

On Tue, Jun 07, 2005 at 10:48:39AM -0700, Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> >
> >
> >Wouldn't having two 'PostgreSQL.Org' booths be confusing? Isn't a "one
> >stop shopping" sort of thing better, where everyone gathers instead of
> >spreading them out between two?
>
> Well that is the question at hand :)
>
> I personally think two booths could be a huge boost. I liken it to car
> dealers. I can point at 4 chevy dealerships with 10 miles. All of them
> spreading the chevy joy.

Remember Metcalfe's law? The value of the booth grows with the square
of the number of connections. So if you have twice the number of people
showing Postgres off to twice the number of visitors, you quadruple the
overall booth value, while having two booths would only duplicate it.

Not sure if the application of the law is correct but it sounds cool
anyway ...

--
Alvaro Herrera (<alvherre[a]surnet.cl>)
"Un poeta es un mundo encerrado en un hombre" (Victor Hugo)

In response to

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Fetter 2005-06-07 20:43:18 Re: [IMPORTANT] OSCON 1 or 2 booths?
Previous Message Josh Berkus 2005-06-07 19:00:24 Re: [IMPORTANT] OSCON 1 or 2 booths?